CollAborative care and active surveillance for Screen-Positive EldeRs with subthreshold depression (CASPER): a multicentred randomised controlled trial of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

Helen Lewis, Joy Adamson, Katie Atherton, Della Bailey, Jacqueline Birtwistle, Katharine Bosanquet, Emily Clare, Jaime Delgadillo, David Ekers, Deborah Foster, Rhian Gabe, Samantha Gascoyne, Lesley Haley, Rebecca Hargate, Catherine Hewitt, John Holmes, Ada Keding, Amanda Lilley-Kelly, Jahnese Maya, Dean McMillanShaista Meer, Jodi Meredith, Natasha Mitchell, Sarah Nutbrown, Karen Overend, Madeline Pasterfield, David Richards, Karen Spilsbury, David Torgerson, Gemma Traviss-Turner, Dominic Trépel, Rebecca Woodhouse, Friederike Ziegler, Simon Gilbody

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Background: Efforts to reduce the burden of illness and personal suffering associated with depression in older adults have focused on those with more severe depressive syndromes. Less attention has been paid to those with mild disorders/subthreshold depression, but these patients also suffer significant impairments in their quality of life and level of functioning. There is currently no clear evidence-based guidance regarding treatment for this patient group. Objectives: To establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a low-intensity intervention of collaborative care for primary care older adults who screened positive for subthreshold depression. Design: A pragmatic, multicentred, two-arm, parallel, individually randomised controlled trial with a qualitative study embedded within the pilot. Randomisation occurred after informed consent and baseline measures were collected. Setting: Thirty-two general practitioner (GP) practices in the north of England. Participants: A total of 705 participants aged ≥ 75 years during the pilot phase and ≥ 65 years during the main trial with subthreshold depression. Interventions: Participants in the intervention group received a low-intensity intervention of collaborative care, which included behavioural activation delivered by a case manager for an average of six sessions over 7–8 weeks, alongside usual GP care. Control-arm participants received only usual GP care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was a self-reported measure of depression severity, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items PHQ-9 score at 4 months post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures included the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, Short Form questionnaire-12 items, Patient Health Questionnaire-15 items, Generalised Anxiety Disorder seven-item scale, Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale two-item version, a medication questionnaire and objective data. Participants were followed up for 12 months. Results: In total, 705 participants were randomised (collaborative care n = 344, usual care n = 361), with 586 participants (83%; collaborative care 76%, usual care 90%) followed up at 4 months and 519 participants (74%; collaborative care 68%, usual care 79%) followed up at 12 months. Attrition was markedly greater in the collaborative care arm. Model estimates at the primary end point of 4 months revealed a statistically significant effect in favour of collaborative care compared with usual care [mean difference 1.31 score points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.95 score points; p < 0.001]. The difference equates to a standard effect size of 0.30, for which the trial was powered. Treatment differences measured by the PHQ-9 were maintained at 12 months’ follow-up (mean difference 1.33 score points, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.10 score points; p = 0.001). Base-case cost-effectiveness analysis found that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £9633 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). On average, participants allocated to collaborative care displayed significantly higher QALYs than those allocated to the control group (annual difference in adjusted QALYs of 0.044, 95% bias-corrected CI 0.015 to 0.072; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Collaborative care has been shown to be clinically effective and cost-effective for older adults with subthreshold depression and to reduce the proportion of people who go on to develop case-level depression at 12 months. This intervention could feasibly be delivered in the NHS at an acceptable cost–benefit ratio. Important future work would include investigating the longer-term effect of collaborative care on the CASPER population, which could be conducted by introducing an extension to follow-up, and investigating the impact of collaborative care on managing multimorbidities in people with subthreshold depression.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-196
Number of pages197
JournalHealth technology assessment
Volume21
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2017

Bibliographical note

© 2017, Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.

Keywords

  • Journal Article

Access to Document

  • 3009961

    © 2017, Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.

    Final published version, 5.2 MBLicence: Unspecified

Other files and links

    Cite this